Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
|
1) Any non-contact foul, whether during a live or dead ball, is a technical.
2) Only personal fouls can be called intentional. [/B]
|
1) One of the definitions of fighting is "an attempt to strike, punch or kick....". This is a case where, if this happened during a live ball, you could have a flagrant personal foul without contact.
2) Technical fouls can be intentional also, as per Rule 4-19-3. [/B][/QUOTE]
JR,
I would still call #1 a flagrant technical for fighting because it is a non-contact foul. I agree with you on #2. Obviously, contact during a dead ball which is deemed intentional, but not flagrant, would be an intentional technical foul.
Mark,
There is one exception which I know of to what you wrote in your #1. There is a case book play (3.3.6 Sit B) in which a bleeding player wipes his blood on an opponent in order to cause him to have to leave the game too. This certainly involves contact, but the ruling says that it is an unsporting technical foul.
[Edited by Nevadaref on Jun 6th, 2004 at 10:50 PM]